VI. Gerard of York, Precursor of English Reformation
GERARD OF YORK (d. 1108) sprang from noble Norman ancestry. He became precentor of the cathedral of Rouen, and was a counselor and ambassador for the kings of England. Gerard was the leading supporter of William I, William II, and Henry I in their quarrel with the Papacy over the issue of investitures. Made archbishop of York in 1101, he occupied that see until 1108. Because of his aggressive attitude in defending the rights of the crown, he was drawn into bitter conflict with Anselm of Canterbury, finally losing and having to submit to the claims of the primate. He was one of the great figures of his time and was, intellectually at least, the equal of Anselm of Canterbury. But his character was not free from blemish. For this reason, and because of his vigorous support of the royal against the pontifical power, an unprejudiced verdict upon him is hardly to be looked for, since our chief knowledge of him is from ecclesiastical historians. Such is the conclusion of his biographer in the Dictionary of National Biography.PFF1 618.2
There exists, however, a very interesting little book, called Tractatus Eboracenses (York Treatises), which was attributed to an “Anonymous of York” whom Alois Dempf, German scholar of medieval history, definitely identifies with Gerard of York. This little work contains most revolutionary thoughts for those times, and it is no wonder that it was not well received and soon disappeared. The writer divides time into three eras. First there is the Old Testament era, with a professional priest hood having a typical significance, beginning with Adam and leading to Christ. Then there is the second era, of the New Testament, lasting from the first advent of Christ to the second advent, with the true and universal priesthood. And finally, the third era, that of the eternal Jerusalem, without any priest hood.PFF1 618.3
The kingdom of the devil is here completely separated from any definite structure in this world, and is considered to be the amoral and sinful life which exists as the sublayer beneath the positive consciousness of God’s power in men to bring about the kingdom of God. The grace of God, which leads to the new birth from God, and the Holy Spirit make us at the same time children of God. We become living stones in the true and holy temple of God and of the heavenly kingdom, which is far superior to all temples built of stone. PFF1 619.1
1. UNIVERSAL PRIESTHOOD OF THE LAITY
In this temple the holy faith of the heart is the altar. We have to bring our faith as a holy sacrifice pleasing to God, that we may become one body. This universal priesthood of all believers, not merely the hierarchy, is the highest kind of priesthood, because the “corpus Christi, quod est ecclesia in quo omnia membra divino ordine disposita sunt” (the body of Christ, which is the church in which all members have been arranged in divine order) is the eye and the face of the church; and further, because the garment of baptism, by which we have been clothed with Christ, is incomparably higher than the stole of the priesthood. To hear the Word of God itself, in such a way that it becomes eternal life, is much more valuable than merely to hear the preaching. To take part of the body of Christ in the Eucharist is greater than to consecrate it. Thus we become partakers not only of the grace of God but of the nature of God. PFF1 619.2
What, then, is the value of the priesthood? It does not lie primarily in teaching. If the pope were simply set up in order to teach, that would be superfluous, because we have the prophets, the Gospels, and the writings of the apostles, which contain all God’s commands. And the knowledge of this is more widespread among us than it is with him. The pope may go to the heathen to teach them. No bishop is subject to the Roman church. He is responsible only to the universal church. More over, according to the scale of rank and position in the heavenly kingdom (Luke 22:24), and according to the teachings of Peter himself, the pope is subjected to every human creature. The churches of Rome and Rouen are “one single Peter”; that is, Rome is not superior to Rouen.PFF1 620.1
2. ROMAN PRIMACY FROM MAN ONLY
Rome became the mother of all churches only per potentiam romani imperii et propter urbis excellentiam quae caput est totius orbis (through the power of the Roman Empire, and because of the excellency of the city, which is the head of all the world). But in the ancient church such was not the case. Then Jerusalem was mother of all the churches. Zion, the heavenly Jerusalem, possesses the honor and the secret of the mother. Zion is the seat of Christ. He Himself is her High Priest, the apostles are His priests, and Stephen is His deacon. From Zion the law is pro claimed. The Roman church has received that preference from men only, not from Christ and His apostles.PFF1 620.2
The present priesthood is created to fill a special need. Through the devil’s instigation many splits occurred, and every priest began to consider his church members his own property and not Christ’s property; therefore one priest had to be chosen above all others to avoid schisms and dissensions, but originally the church was led by a general council of the presbyters (communi presbyterorum consilio). Thus he taught.PFF1 620.3
Gerard was precocious for his time. He remained the Anonymous of York, but is surely to be counted a forerunner of the Reformation. It is highly probable that Wyclif came across Gerard’s tract in Oxford, and was indebted to him. All the main points of the Reformation are here clearly stated-as, for instance, the universal priesthood, the Scripture as basis for religious teaching, the presbytery of the early church, and the fact that sacraments, except the Eucharist, are mere symbols.PFF1 621.1